US20030067610A1 - Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor - Google Patents
Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20030067610A1 US20030067610A1 US09/974,432 US97443201A US2003067610A1 US 20030067610 A1 US20030067610 A1 US 20030067610A1 US 97443201 A US97443201 A US 97443201A US 2003067610 A1 US2003067610 A1 US 2003067610A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- split
- shear
- portions
- actuators
- wavefront
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Granted
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01J—MEASUREMENT OF INTENSITY, VELOCITY, SPECTRAL CONTENT, POLARISATION, PHASE OR PULSE CHARACTERISTICS OF INFRARED, VISIBLE OR ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT; COLORIMETRY; RADIATION PYROMETRY
- G01J9/00—Measuring optical phase difference; Determining degree of coherence; Measuring optical wavelength
- G01J9/02—Measuring optical phase difference; Determining degree of coherence; Measuring optical wavelength by interferometric methods
- G01J9/0215—Measuring optical phase difference; Determining degree of coherence; Measuring optical wavelength by interferometric methods by shearing interferometric methods
Definitions
- This invention relates generally to an optical system for correcting wavefront phase aberrations of a light beam and, more particularly, to a lateral shearing interferometer wavefront sensor and associated optical system that employs a double-shear/full-aperture approach to correct for branch points in the wavefront of an optical beam that has been subjected to aberrations.
- Certain types of optical transmission systems such as optical communications systems, imaging systems, etc., transmit a coherent light beam carrying information through a medium, such as air. Because the light beam is coherent, the phase of the beam is substantially constant across the beam wavefront when it is generated. However, conditions in the medium, such as turbulence in the air, typically corrupts the beam by introducing distortions that cause some portions of the wavefront to have a different phase than other portions of the wavefront at any given instant in time. If this wavefront phase aberration was not corrected at the receiver, the light beam could not be effectively focused onto receiving optics, such as a fiber optic cable, and thus a significant intensity of the beam could be lost. Therefore, it is known in the art to correct wavefront aberrations at the receiver of an optical system of this type.
- a wavefront sensor such as a Hartmann sensor
- Hartmann sensors typically employ an array of lenslets for dividing the wavefront into a matrix of subapertures. Each of the beams in the subapertures is focused by the lenslets onto one or more detectors forming an array of spots on the detectors. The position of the spots provides a direct indication of the wavefront tilt for each subaperture. These tilts are then used by a wavefront reconstructor to generate a surface representative of the phase relationship of the measured beam wavefront.
- a deformable mirror is employed to generate a compliment of the surface generated by the reconstructor.
- the aberated light beam is reflected off of the mirror that provides a corrected beam substantially free of wavefront phase aberations.
- the deformable mirror typically includes an array of actuators positioned behind the mirror that act to deform the mirror at the desired locations to provide the compliment of the sensed wavefront to correct the phase. This process is performed many times a second depending on the particular application.
- a lateral shearing interferometer (LSI) wavefront sensor is used in combination with the wavefront reconstructor and deformable mirror to provide branch point corrections in the wavefront of the optical beam.
- a branch point is a point in the wavefront where the phase has a screw-like dislocation.
- branch cuts In order to correct a wavefront with branch points, one-wave steps must be made in the surface of the deformable mirror, referred to as branch cuts.
- LSI wavefront sensor is discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,163,381, titled Dual Sensor Atmospheric Correction System, assigned to the assignee of this application and herein incorporated by reference.
- LSI wavefront sensors provide a copy of the beam being corrected that is shifted in the x-direction by a distance equal to the spacing between actuators on the deformable mirror.
- the original beam and the shifted beam are combined to provide an interference pattern depicting the phase difference therebetween.
- the combined beam is then applied to an array of detectors to measure the interference pattern.
- the intensity of the light measured by the detectors provides a measure of the tilt of the wavefront in the x-direction, and thus the relative phase relationship of the original beam.
- the same process is also provided to measure the tilt of the beam wavefront in the y-direction.
- the LSI wavefront sensor 10 employs a Mach-Zehnder LSI 12 including an input beam splitter 14 , an output beam combiner 16 , two plane reflectors 18 and 20 and a beam shifter 22 .
- An incident beam 24 is split by the beam splitter 14 into first and second split beams 26 and 28 that propagate along separate beam paths, where the two beam paths are equal in length, and are then combined by the beam combiner 16 .
- the split beam 28 propagates through the beam shifter 22 , and is shifted thereby.
- first and second beams 26 and 28 reach the beam combiner 16 , they are offset relative to each other a predetermined distance as set by the beam shifter 22 .
- the beams 26 and 28 are combined as output beam 30 , and the interference pattern created by the combination of the beams 26 and 28 is sensed by a detector 32 .
- the LSI wavefront sensor 10 is able to determine the tilt in the wavefront of the input beam 24 in this manner.
- the amount of shift of the beam 28 is typically set as the distance between the actuators on the deformable mirror, and is referred to as a “unit shear”.
- the distance that the split beam 28 is shifted defines areas in the beam 28 that are one actuator apart as compared to the same area in the beam 26 .
- the adjacent portions of the beams 26 and 28 that are interfered with in the combined beam 30 provide a measure of the phase difference between the interfered portions.
- the detector 32 detects the phase difference between the beam portions because bright areas in the combined beam 30 are constructive interference areas of the beams 26 and 28 that are in-phase, and dark areas in the combined beam 30 are destructive interference areas of the beams 26 and 28 that are out-of-phase.
- the LSI wavefront sensor 10 provides lateral shearing in one of either the x-direction or the y-direction. A second LSI wavefront sensor is employed for the other direction.
- the detected signal by the detector 32 is sent to a wavefront reconstructor that then controls the actuators on the deformable mirror, as discussed above.
- FIG. 2 is a one-dimensional schematic diagram showing the problem identified above.
- This diagram shows a surface 40 of a deformable mirror including a first surface portion 42 and a second surface portion 44 , where the surface portions 42 and 44 are about one wavelength of the beam 24 apart and are connected by a sloped portion 46 .
- the sloped portion 46 represents a branch cut.
- An actuator 52 is shown positioned adjacent the surface portion 44
- an actuator 54 is shown positioned adjacent to the surface portion 42 .
- the actuators 52 and 54 push up on the surface portions 42 and 44 , respectively, in response to a control signal to generate a compliment of the wavefront surface as calculated by the wavefront reconstructor.
- the maximum distance the surface portions 42 and 44 can be apart is the one wavelength of the beam 24 .
- the deformable mirror would include many actuators positioned relative to many branch cuts on the deformable mirror to correct the complete wavefront in this manner.
- the first and second split beams 26 and 28 are spatially offset from one another when they are interfered with. This spatial offset is determined by the distance between the actuators on the deformable mirror, where the wavefront of each beam 26 and 28 can be defined as a combination of separate portions between the actuators.
- FIG. 2 shows a beam area 60 representative of a portion of the first beam 26 , and a beam area 62 representative of a portion of the second beam 28 .
- the beam areas 60 and 62 are portions in the beams 26 and 28 that are aligned and interfered with by the combiner 16 .
- the beam areas 60 and 62 are the same area in the combined beam 30 that were adjacent to each other by the shifted distance in the first and second beams 26 and 28 .
- the beam areas 60 and 62 will align in a one-to-one relationship.
- the beam areas 60 and 62 are contiguous with each other and are positioned so that part of the beam areas 60 and 62 are over the sloped portion 46 between the actuators 52 and 54 , as shown.
- Each beam area 60 and 62 has a dimension (unit shear) in both the x and y direction that is the distance between actuators. This causes the beam areas 60 and 62 to contact each other.
- the full wavefront of the beams 26 and 28 would include many such beam areas relative to the actuators on the deformable mirror in this manner. This diagram only shows one beam area for each of the beams 26 and 28 to simplify the discussion.
- FIG. 2 also shows a beam area 64 of the beam 26 and a beam area 66 of the beam 28 that are those portions of the beams 26 and 28 that are directly interfered with when the beams 26 and 28 are combined.
- the size of the areas 60 and 62 is reduced to form the areas 64 and 66 so that the areas 64 and 66 are not contiguous.
- the shear distance is still, however, a unit shear. Because the unmasked beam portions defining the areas 64 and 66 are directly aligned with the actuators 52 and 54 , these portions do not extend over the branch cut, the sloped portion 46 , and do not suffer from the performance limitations discussed herein.
- the unit-shear/partial aperture approach corrects the problem with unit-shear/full aperture approach by blocking the light that is not directly on top of the actuators. This improves the performance dramatically, and is the best solution if there is adequate signal. There are situations, however, where the optical signal level is too low so that the unit-shear/partial aperture approach does not have enough light to operate properly. In other words, because a significant portion of the beams 26 and 28 is masked in this approach, in those cases where the total light is already limited, further reducing the amount of light significantly limits the performance of the receiver.
- a lateral shearing interferometer wavefront sensor system employs a double-shear/full aperture approach to correct for branch points in the wavefront of an optical beam that has been aberrated.
- the wavefront sensor system includes a lateral shearing interferometer having a beam splitter that splits the optical beam into a first split beam and a second split beam, a beam shifter that shifts the first split beam relative to the second split beam, and a beam combiner that combines the first and second split beams into a combined beam.
- the interference pattern generated by the combined beam is detected by a detector, where beam portions of the first and second split beams are defined in the interference pattern.
- a wavefront reconstructor receives signals from the detector and reconstructs the beam wavefront.
- a deformable mirror is provided having a plurality of actuators, where the actuators deform the mirror to correct the beam wavefront.
- the interfered beam portions are a double shear in distance apart, or twice the distance between actuators. In this manner, interfering portions of the split beams do not align with branch cuts between the actuators.
- the interfering portions of the split beams are defined relative to the actuators such that one set of opposing edges of the beam portions align with adjacent actuators, and the other set of opposing edges of the beam portions are positioned between adjacent actuators. The opposing edges of the beam portions between the actuators is in the shear direction.
- FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a lateral shear interferometer wavefront sensor
- FIG. 2 is a schematic representation of interfering beam portions relative to a deformable mirror in an LSI wavefront sensor for a unit-shear/full aperture configuration, a unit-shear/partial aperture configuration and double-shear/full aperture configuration, where the double-shear/full aperture approach depicts the present invention
- FIG. 3 shows a two-dimensional representation of the position of x-direction and y-direction beam interfering portions relative to the actuators on a deformable mirror, according to the present invention
- FIG. 4 is a graph with steps on the horizontal axis and on-axis power on the vertical axis depicting the relative performance between an LSI wavefront sensor employing a unit-shear/full aperture approach, a unit-shear/partial aperture approach and a double-shear/full aperture approach at high signal intensity; and
- FIG. 5 is a graph with steps on the horizontal axis and on-axis power on the vertical axis showing the relative performance between an LSI wavefront sensor employing a unit-shear/full aperture approach, a unit-shear/partial aperture approach, and a double-shear/full aperture approach at low signal intensity.
- the LSI wavefront sensor proposed herein operates with the full signal level of the unit-shear/full aperture approach, discussed above, without suffering as much performance degradation as the unit-shear/partial aperture approach at low signal levels. It accomplishes this by operating with two units of lateral shear instead of one, with interdigitated measurements. This makes the critical measurement at the branch cut immune to the mirror surface shape between actuators on the deformable mirror. This is where the errors occurred on the unit-shear/full aperture LSI wavefront sensor, and why the unit-shear/partial aperture configuration worked better (the part of the aperture used was over the actuators, not on the slope between actuators). By going to a two-unit (double) shear, both areas involved in the shear at a branch cut are on the flat area of the deformable mirror.
- FIG. 2 also shows how the double-shear/full aperture configuration approach of the invention addresses the problem discussed above.
- beam area 68 is the portion of the beam 26 that is interfered with a beam area 70 of the beam 28 in the same manner as the beam areas 64 and 66 and beam areas 60 and 62 .
- the beam areas 68 and 70 are the same size as the beam areas 60 and 62 in the unit-shear/full aperture approach, but are spaced two actuator distances apart. This distance is a double-shear distance, twice the shear distance as the areas 60 and 62 , giving the two actuator space therebetween.
- the double-shear/full aperture approach uses the same amount of signal as the unit-shear/full aperture approach.
- the alignment of the areas 68 and 70 relative to the surface 40 is such that no part of the areas 68 and 70 are over the sloped portion 46 . Consequently, when the beam areas 68 and 70 are interfered in the combined beam 30 , the interference pattern is a true representation of the distance between the surface portions 42 and 44 that is not affected by the sloped portion 46 .
- the double-shear/full aperture approach of the invention does not suffer the limitations of low signal for this approach.
- the double-shear/full aperture configuration correctly measures perfect constructive interference and the complex reconstructor leaves it alone.
- the next shear positions to the left and right of the beam areas 68 and 70 interfere with the edge of the cut with a flat surface, producing a signal with very little contrast.
- the shear is two units, the measurement tilt gets reduced by a factor of two.
- FIG. 3 shows a surface portion of a deformable mirror 72 , including an array of actuators 74 , that depicts the relationship between the areas interfering and the actuators for both the x and y shear measurements.
- a beam portion 76 represents the beam area 68
- a beam portion 78 represents the beam area 70 .
- the beam portions 76 and 78 are two actuator distances apart (two units of shear), where one set of opposing edges of the portions 76 and 78 cut across the actuators 74 (vertical line in FIG. 3), and the other set of opposing edges of the portions 76 and 78 are between adjacent actuators 74 (horizontal line in FIG. 3).
- the opposing edges between the actuators 74 are in the direction of the shear, here the x-direction.
- the distance of the double-shear discussed herein is twice the distance between adjacent actuators.
- the beam portions 76 and 78 are defined relative to the pixels of the detector 32 .
- beam portions 82 and 84 represent the beam areas 68 and 70 , respectively, in this direction.
- the beam portions 82 and 84 are also shown configured in the same manner as the beam portions 76 and 78 , however, their relative alignment is opposite to that of the beam portions 76 and 78 for the y-direction. In other words, the opposing edges of the beam portions 76 and 78 between the actuators 74 are in the y-direction.
- FIGS. 4 and 5 are graphs that depict the performance of the unit-shear/full aperture, unit-shear/partial aperture and double-shear/full aperture approaches, discussed above, where on-axis power is shown on the vertical axis and time is shown in the horizontal axis.
- the beam intensity is high, and performance of the partial aperture approach would be the best.
- the unit-shear/full aperture approach is relatively unstable because the system continually tries to correct for those parts of the beam areas 60 and 62 above the sloped portion 46 . Because these portions are not one-wave apart, they tend to correct in the wrong direction. Where the benefits of the present invention are noticed, are in low signal-to-noise situations, as shown in FIG. 5, where the light intensity is low. In this depiction, it is shown that the double-shear/full aperture approach of the present invention provides the best performance.
Landscapes
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Spectroscopy & Molecular Physics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Instruments For Measurement Of Length By Optical Means (AREA)
- Mechanical Light Control Or Optical Switches (AREA)
Abstract
Description
- 1. Field of the Invention
- This invention relates generally to an optical system for correcting wavefront phase aberrations of a light beam and, more particularly, to a lateral shearing interferometer wavefront sensor and associated optical system that employs a double-shear/full-aperture approach to correct for branch points in the wavefront of an optical beam that has been subjected to aberrations.
- 2. Discussion of the Related Art
- Certain types of optical transmission systems, such as optical communications systems, imaging systems, etc., transmit a coherent light beam carrying information through a medium, such as air. Because the light beam is coherent, the phase of the beam is substantially constant across the beam wavefront when it is generated. However, conditions in the medium, such as turbulence in the air, typically corrupts the beam by introducing distortions that cause some portions of the wavefront to have a different phase than other portions of the wavefront at any given instant in time. If this wavefront phase aberration was not corrected at the receiver, the light beam could not be effectively focused onto receiving optics, such as a fiber optic cable, and thus a significant intensity of the beam could be lost. Therefore, it is known in the art to correct wavefront aberrations at the receiver of an optical system of this type.
- Different systems are known in the art to correct wavefront aberrations in an optical system of the type being discussed herein. Typically, these types of systems employ a wavefront sensor, such as a Hartmann sensor, that measures the phase of individual portions of the beam wavefront. Hartmann sensors typically employ an array of lenslets for dividing the wavefront into a matrix of subapertures. Each of the beams in the subapertures is focused by the lenslets onto one or more detectors forming an array of spots on the detectors. The position of the spots provides a direct indication of the wavefront tilt for each subaperture. These tilts are then used by a wavefront reconstructor to generate a surface representative of the phase relationship of the measured beam wavefront. A deformable mirror is employed to generate a compliment of the surface generated by the reconstructor. The aberated light beam is reflected off of the mirror that provides a corrected beam substantially free of wavefront phase aberations. The deformable mirror typically includes an array of actuators positioned behind the mirror that act to deform the mirror at the desired locations to provide the compliment of the sensed wavefront to correct the phase. This process is performed many times a second depending on the particular application.
- In another known system, a lateral shearing interferometer (LSI) wavefront sensor is used in combination with the wavefront reconstructor and deformable mirror to provide branch point corrections in the wavefront of the optical beam. A branch point is a point in the wavefront where the phase has a screw-like dislocation. In order to correct a wavefront with branch points, one-wave steps must be made in the surface of the deformable mirror, referred to as branch cuts. One known example of an LSI wavefront sensor is discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,163,381, titled Dual Sensor Atmospheric Correction System, assigned to the assignee of this application and herein incorporated by reference.
- LSI wavefront sensors provide a copy of the beam being corrected that is shifted in the x-direction by a distance equal to the spacing between actuators on the deformable mirror. The original beam and the shifted beam are combined to provide an interference pattern depicting the phase difference therebetween. The combined beam is then applied to an array of detectors to measure the interference pattern. The intensity of the light measured by the detectors provides a measure of the tilt of the wavefront in the x-direction, and thus the relative phase relationship of the original beam. The same process is also provided to measure the tilt of the beam wavefront in the y-direction.
- An example of an
LSI wavefront sensor 10 is shown by schematic diagram in FIG. 1. TheLSI wavefront sensor 10 employs a Mach-ZehnderLSI 12 including aninput beam splitter 14, an output beam combiner 16, two 18 and 20 and aplane reflectors beam shifter 22. Anincident beam 24 is split by thebeam splitter 14 into first and 26 and 28 that propagate along separate beam paths, where the two beam paths are equal in length, and are then combined by the beam combiner 16. Thesecond split beams split beam 28 propagates through thebeam shifter 22, and is shifted thereby. Therefore, when the first and 26 and 28 reach the beam combiner 16, they are offset relative to each other a predetermined distance as set by thesecond beams beam shifter 22. The 26 and 28 are combined asbeams output beam 30, and the interference pattern created by the combination of the 26 and 28 is sensed by abeams detector 32. - The
LSI wavefront sensor 10 is able to determine the tilt in the wavefront of theinput beam 24 in this manner. The amount of shift of thebeam 28 is typically set as the distance between the actuators on the deformable mirror, and is referred to as a “unit shear”. In other words, the distance that thesplit beam 28 is shifted defines areas in thebeam 28 that are one actuator apart as compared to the same area in thebeam 26. The adjacent portions of the 26 and 28 that are interfered with in the combinedbeams beam 30 provide a measure of the phase difference between the interfered portions. Thedetector 32 detects the phase difference between the beam portions because bright areas in the combinedbeam 30 are constructive interference areas of the 26 and 28 that are in-phase, and dark areas in the combinedbeams beam 30 are destructive interference areas of the 26 and 28 that are out-of-phase. Thebeams LSI wavefront sensor 10 provides lateral shearing in one of either the x-direction or the y-direction. A second LSI wavefront sensor is employed for the other direction. The detected signal by thedetector 32 is sent to a wavefront reconstructor that then controls the actuators on the deformable mirror, as discussed above. - Two different unit-shear approaches are known to operate an LSI wavefront sensor in this type of system. These approaches include a unit-shear/full aperture approach and a unit-shear/partial aperture approach. As will be discussed in more detail below, when signal levels are high, the partial aperture configuration works the best, as suggested in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/410,011, filed Sep. 30, 1999, titled Improved Lateral Shearing Interferometer System, also assigned to the assignee of this application and herein incorporated by reference. However, because the masking of the beams required by the partial aperture approach decreases the available signal, this approach fails at low optical signal levels where the full aperture approach is still working, although at reduced performance.
- FIG. 2 is a one-dimensional schematic diagram showing the problem identified above. This diagram shows a
surface 40 of a deformable mirror including afirst surface portion 42 and asecond surface portion 44, where the 42 and 44 are about one wavelength of thesurface portions beam 24 apart and are connected by asloped portion 46. Thesloped portion 46 represents a branch cut. Anactuator 52 is shown positioned adjacent thesurface portion 44, and anactuator 54 is shown positioned adjacent to thesurface portion 42. The 52 and 54 push up on theactuators 42 and 44, respectively, in response to a control signal to generate a compliment of the wavefront surface as calculated by the wavefront reconstructor. The maximum distance thesurface portions 42 and 44 can be apart is the one wavelength of thesurface portions beam 24. As would be appreciated by those skilled in the art, the deformable mirror would include many actuators positioned relative to many branch cuts on the deformable mirror to correct the complete wavefront in this manner. - As discussed above, the first and
26 and 28 are spatially offset from one another when they are interfered with. This spatial offset is determined by the distance between the actuators on the deformable mirror, where the wavefront of eachsecond split beams 26 and 28 can be defined as a combination of separate portions between the actuators. For the unit-shear/full aperture approach, FIG. 2 shows abeam beam area 60 representative of a portion of thefirst beam 26, and abeam area 62 representative of a portion of thesecond beam 28. The 60 and 62 are portions in thebeam areas 26 and 28 that are aligned and interfered with by thebeams combiner 16. In other words, the 60 and 62 are the same area in the combinedbeam areas beam 30 that were adjacent to each other by the shifted distance in the first and 26 and 28. When thesecond beams 26 and 28 are combined, thebeams 60 and 62 will align in a one-to-one relationship.beam areas - As is apparent, the
60 and 62 are contiguous with each other and are positioned so that part of thebeam areas 60 and 62 are over the slopedbeam areas portion 46 between the 52 and 54, as shown. Eachactuators 60 and 62 has a dimension (unit shear) in both the x and y direction that is the distance between actuators. This causes thebeam area 60 and 62 to contact each other. The full wavefront of thebeam areas 26 and 28 would include many such beam areas relative to the actuators on the deformable mirror in this manner. This diagram only shows one beam area for each of thebeams 26 and 28 to simplify the discussion. Because parts of thebeams 60 and 62 align with the branch cut or the slopedbeam areas portion 46, the difference in the relative phase over the 60 and 62 limits the beam reconstruction performance. In other words, when thecomplete areas 60 and 62 are interfered, the result is not the desired result, perfect constructive interference, because of the intermediate areas interfering between the zero, or one-wave, areas. This produces a bogus tilt in the wavefront sensor, which causes the wavefront reconstructor to change the surface away from what it should be, resulting in instability and poor performance.areas - In order to overcome these limitations in the unit-shear/full aperture approach, it has been suggested in the '011 application that better wavefront sensor performance can be achieved by limiting the size of the
60 and 62. Particularly, in the unit-shear/partial aperture approach, theareas 26 and 28 are masked by thebeams LSI 12 so that only those beam portions directly above the 52 and 54 are interfered. FIG. 2 also shows aactuators beam area 64 of thebeam 26 and abeam area 66 of thebeam 28 that are those portions of the 26 and 28 that are directly interfered with when thebeams 26 and 28 are combined. The size of thebeams 60 and 62 is reduced to form theareas 64 and 66 so that theareas 64 and 66 are not contiguous. The shear distance is still, however, a unit shear. Because the unmasked beam portions defining theareas 64 and 66 are directly aligned with theareas 52 and 54, these portions do not extend over the branch cut, the slopedactuators portion 46, and do not suffer from the performance limitations discussed herein. - The unit-shear/partial aperture approach corrects the problem with unit-shear/full aperture approach by blocking the light that is not directly on top of the actuators. This improves the performance dramatically, and is the best solution if there is adequate signal. There are situations, however, where the optical signal level is too low so that the unit-shear/partial aperture approach does not have enough light to operate properly. In other words, because a significant portion of the
26 and 28 is masked in this approach, in those cases where the total light is already limited, further reducing the amount of light significantly limits the performance of the receiver.beams - What is needed is an LSI wavefront sensor that has the advantages of the unit-shear/partial aperture approach, but does not suffer from poor performance at low signal levels. It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide such an LSI wavefront sensor.
- In accordance with the teachings of the present invention, a lateral shearing interferometer wavefront sensor system is disclosed that employs a double-shear/full aperture approach to correct for branch points in the wavefront of an optical beam that has been aberrated. The wavefront sensor system includes a lateral shearing interferometer having a beam splitter that splits the optical beam into a first split beam and a second split beam, a beam shifter that shifts the first split beam relative to the second split beam, and a beam combiner that combines the first and second split beams into a combined beam. The interference pattern generated by the combined beam is detected by a detector, where beam portions of the first and second split beams are defined in the interference pattern. A wavefront reconstructor receives signals from the detector and reconstructs the beam wavefront. A deformable mirror is provided having a plurality of actuators, where the actuators deform the mirror to correct the beam wavefront.
- The interfered beam portions are a double shear in distance apart, or twice the distance between actuators. In this manner, interfering portions of the split beams do not align with branch cuts between the actuators. The interfering portions of the split beams are defined relative to the actuators such that one set of opposing edges of the beam portions align with adjacent actuators, and the other set of opposing edges of the beam portions are positioned between adjacent actuators. The opposing edges of the beam portions between the actuators is in the shear direction.
- Further areas of applicability of the present invention will become apparent from the detailed description provided hereinafter. It should be understood that the detailed description and specific examples, while indicating the preferred embodiment of the invention, are intended for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to limited the scope of the invention.
- FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a lateral shear interferometer wavefront sensor;
- FIG. 2 is a schematic representation of interfering beam portions relative to a deformable mirror in an LSI wavefront sensor for a unit-shear/full aperture configuration, a unit-shear/partial aperture configuration and double-shear/full aperture configuration, where the double-shear/full aperture approach depicts the present invention;
- FIG. 3 shows a two-dimensional representation of the position of x-direction and y-direction beam interfering portions relative to the actuators on a deformable mirror, according to the present invention;
- FIG. 4 is a graph with steps on the horizontal axis and on-axis power on the vertical axis depicting the relative performance between an LSI wavefront sensor employing a unit-shear/full aperture approach, a unit-shear/partial aperture approach and a double-shear/full aperture approach at high signal intensity; and
- FIG. 5 is a graph with steps on the horizontal axis and on-axis power on the vertical axis showing the relative performance between an LSI wavefront sensor employing a unit-shear/full aperture approach, a unit-shear/partial aperture approach, and a double-shear/full aperture approach at low signal intensity.
- The following discussion of the preferred embodiments directed to a double-shear/full aperture LSI wavefront sensor is merely exemplary in nature and is in no way intended to limit the invention or its applications or uses.
- The LSI wavefront sensor proposed herein operates with the full signal level of the unit-shear/full aperture approach, discussed above, without suffering as much performance degradation as the unit-shear/partial aperture approach at low signal levels. It accomplishes this by operating with two units of lateral shear instead of one, with interdigitated measurements. This makes the critical measurement at the branch cut immune to the mirror surface shape between actuators on the deformable mirror. This is where the errors occurred on the unit-shear/full aperture LSI wavefront sensor, and why the unit-shear/partial aperture configuration worked better (the part of the aperture used was over the actuators, not on the slope between actuators). By going to a two-unit (double) shear, both areas involved in the shear at a branch cut are on the flat area of the deformable mirror.
- The next position over in the array of shear measurements does have some corruption due to the branch cut, but because the measurements are divided by the amount of shear the error is reduced, and because the rapidly varying shear in that area reduces the fringe contrast, the complex reconstructor weights these measurements lower. The end result is that the performance of the system with two units of shear is considerably better than the unit-shear/full aperture approach.
- FIG. 2 also shows how the double-shear/full aperture configuration approach of the invention addresses the problem discussed above. In this figure,
beam area 68 is the portion of thebeam 26 that is interfered with abeam area 70 of thebeam 28 in the same manner as the 64 and 66 andbeam areas 60 and 62. As is apparent, thebeam areas 68 and 70 are the same size as thebeam areas 60 and 62 in the unit-shear/full aperture approach, but are spaced two actuator distances apart. This distance is a double-shear distance, twice the shear distance as thebeam areas 60 and 62, giving the two actuator space therebetween. Because theareas 60, 62, 68 and 70 are the same size, the double-shear/full aperture approach uses the same amount of signal as the unit-shear/full aperture approach. The alignment of theareas 68 and 70 relative to theareas surface 40 is such that no part of the 68 and 70 are over the slopedareas portion 46. Consequently, when the 68 and 70 are interfered in the combinedbeam areas beam 30, the interference pattern is a true representation of the distance between the 42 and 44 that is not affected by the slopedsurface portions portion 46. Further, because the amount of light used is more than the unit-shear/partial aperture approach, the double-shear/full aperture approach of the invention does not suffer the limitations of low signal for this approach. - At the cut (sloped portion 46), the double-shear/full aperture configuration correctly measures perfect constructive interference and the complex reconstructor leaves it alone. The next shear positions to the left and right of the
68 and 70 interfere with the edge of the cut with a flat surface, producing a signal with very little contrast. Further, since the shear is two units, the measurement tilt gets reduced by a factor of two. Combined with the constraints imposed by the complex reconstructor (there are generally about twice as many tilt measurements as degrees of freedom from the actuator positions and the reconstructor weights measurements by their contrast), the resulting performance of the system is improved.beam areas - FIG. 3 shows a surface portion of a
deformable mirror 72, including an array ofactuators 74, that depicts the relationship between the areas interfering and the actuators for both the x and y shear measurements. In the x-direction, abeam portion 76 represents thebeam area 68 and abeam portion 78 represents thebeam area 70. The 76 and 78 are two actuator distances apart (two units of shear), where one set of opposing edges of thebeam portions 76 and 78 cut across the actuators 74 (vertical line in FIG. 3), and the other set of opposing edges of theportions 76 and 78 are between adjacent actuators 74 (horizontal line in FIG. 3). The opposing edges between theportions actuators 74 are in the direction of the shear, here the x-direction. The distance of the double-shear discussed herein is twice the distance between adjacent actuators. The 76 and 78 are defined relative to the pixels of thebeam portions detector 32. - In the y-direction portion of the
mirror 72, 82 and 84 represent thebeam portions 68 and 70, respectively, in this direction. Thebeam areas 82 and 84 are also shown configured in the same manner as thebeam portions 76 and 78, however, their relative alignment is opposite to that of thebeam portions 76 and 78 for the y-direction. In other words, the opposing edges of thebeam portions 76 and 78 between thebeam portions actuators 74 are in the y-direction. - FIGS. 4 and 5 are graphs that depict the performance of the unit-shear/full aperture, unit-shear/partial aperture and double-shear/full aperture approaches, discussed above, where on-axis power is shown on the vertical axis and time is shown in the horizontal axis. In FIG. 4, the beam intensity is high, and performance of the partial aperture approach would be the best. As is apparent, the unit-shear/full aperture approach is relatively unstable because the system continually tries to correct for those parts of the
60 and 62 above the slopedbeam areas portion 46. Because these portions are not one-wave apart, they tend to correct in the wrong direction. Where the benefits of the present invention are noticed, are in low signal-to-noise situations, as shown in FIG. 5, where the light intensity is low. In this depiction, it is shown that the double-shear/full aperture approach of the present invention provides the best performance. - The description of the invention is merely exemplary in nature and, thus, variations that do not depart from the gist of the invention are intended to be within the scope of the invention. Such variations are not to be regarded as a departure from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Claims (18)
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/974,432 US6587215B2 (en) | 2001-10-09 | 2001-10-09 | Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/974,432 US6587215B2 (en) | 2001-10-09 | 2001-10-09 | Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| US20030067610A1 true US20030067610A1 (en) | 2003-04-10 |
| US6587215B2 US6587215B2 (en) | 2003-07-01 |
Family
ID=25522029
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/974,432 Expired - Lifetime US6587215B2 (en) | 2001-10-09 | 2001-10-09 | Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US6587215B2 (en) |
Cited By (4)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20070195329A1 (en) * | 2006-02-17 | 2007-08-23 | The Boeing Company | Holographically compensated, self-referenced interferometer |
| WO2009134407A1 (en) * | 2008-04-30 | 2009-11-05 | Corning Incorporated | Optical package having deformable mirrors for focus compensation |
| CN102297725A (en) * | 2011-05-18 | 2011-12-28 | 中国科学院长春光学精密机械与物理研究所 | Device and method for detecting reference spherical wave deviation in visible point diffraction interferometer |
| CN102519609A (en) * | 2011-12-13 | 2012-06-27 | 中国科学院光电研究院 | Dual-channel lateral shearing interferometer |
Families Citing this family (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6924899B2 (en) * | 2002-05-31 | 2005-08-02 | Optical Physics Company | System for measuring wavefront tilt in optical systems and method of calibrating wavefront sensors |
| TWI245926B (en) * | 2004-05-10 | 2005-12-21 | Chroma Ate Inc | Device and method of an interference scanner |
Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6249351B1 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2001-06-19 | Zygo Corporation | Grazing incidence interferometer and method |
Family Cites Families (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6163381A (en) | 1999-02-24 | 2000-12-19 | Trw Inc. | Dual sensor atmospheric correction system |
| US6249352B1 (en) * | 1999-09-30 | 2001-06-19 | Trw Inc. | Lateral shearing interferometer system with masked interference pattern |
-
2001
- 2001-10-09 US US09/974,432 patent/US6587215B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Patent Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6249351B1 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2001-06-19 | Zygo Corporation | Grazing incidence interferometer and method |
Cited By (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20070195329A1 (en) * | 2006-02-17 | 2007-08-23 | The Boeing Company | Holographically compensated, self-referenced interferometer |
| US7505138B2 (en) * | 2006-02-17 | 2009-03-17 | The Boeing Company | Holographically compensated, self-referenced interferometer |
| WO2009134407A1 (en) * | 2008-04-30 | 2009-11-05 | Corning Incorporated | Optical package having deformable mirrors for focus compensation |
| US20090274178A1 (en) * | 2008-04-30 | 2009-11-05 | Jacques Gollier | Optical Package Having Deformable Mirrors For Focus Compensation |
| US7916769B2 (en) | 2008-04-30 | 2011-03-29 | Corning Incorporated | Optical package having deformable mirrors for focus compensation |
| CN102297725A (en) * | 2011-05-18 | 2011-12-28 | 中国科学院长春光学精密机械与物理研究所 | Device and method for detecting reference spherical wave deviation in visible point diffraction interferometer |
| CN102519609A (en) * | 2011-12-13 | 2012-06-27 | 中国科学院光电研究院 | Dual-channel lateral shearing interferometer |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| US6587215B2 (en) | 2003-07-01 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US6163381A (en) | Dual sensor atmospheric correction system | |
| US4635299A (en) | Discrete phase conjugate technique for precompensation of laser beams transmitted through turbulence | |
| EP1368692B1 (en) | System for effecting high-power beam control with adaptive optics in low power beam path | |
| EP2054749B1 (en) | Beam director and control system for a high energy laser within a conformal window | |
| JP5106114B2 (en) | Optical calibration system and method | |
| JP4730720B2 (en) | Free-space optics for wavelength switching and spectral monitoring applications | |
| US6872960B2 (en) | Robust infrared countermeasure system and method | |
| US8594511B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for maintaining a coherent combined beam during arbitrary steering | |
| US11156503B2 (en) | Wavefront sensor device and method | |
| US6587215B2 (en) | Low signal-to-noise ratio branch-point-capable adaptive optics sensor | |
| Watnik et al. | Wavefront sensing in deep turbulence | |
| JP7668344B2 (en) | Multiple coherent beam combining system with reduced number of apertures | |
| EP0518107B1 (en) | Piston error estimation method for segmented aperture optical systems while observing arbitrary unknown extended scenes | |
| EP0315663B1 (en) | Compact continuous wave wavefront sensor | |
| Véran et al. | Centroid gain compensation in Shack–Hartmann adaptive optics systems with natural or laser guide star | |
| JP2005527784A (en) | Free-space optics for wavelength switching and spectral monitoring applications | |
| US5083015A (en) | Optical centroid processor wavefront sensor | |
| US4946280A (en) | Wavefront analysis for segmented mirror control | |
| US6249352B1 (en) | Lateral shearing interferometer system with masked interference pattern | |
| US7397018B1 (en) | Amplitude and phase controlled adaptive optics system | |
| US6498650B1 (en) | Adaptive optics system using wavefront selection | |
| Esposito et al. | Closed-loop performance of pyramid wavefront sensor | |
| US5886800A (en) | Large optics compensated imaging systems | |
| EP0246318B1 (en) | Amplitude-weighting adaptive laser | |
| US5113065A (en) | Heterodyne circular photodetector array in a tracking system |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: TRW INC., CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:DAVIES, DONALD W.;REEL/FRAME:012258/0355 Effective date: 20010926 |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:TRW, INC. N/K/A NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE AND MISSION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, AN OHIO CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:013751/0849 Effective date: 20030122 Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION,CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:TRW, INC. N/K/A NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE AND MISSION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, AN OHIO CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:013751/0849 Effective date: 20030122 |
|
| STCF | Information on status: patent grant |
Free format text: PATENTED CASE |
|
| FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 4 |
|
| FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: PAYOR NUMBER ASSIGNED (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: ASPN); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS CORP.,CAL Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORTION;REEL/FRAME:023699/0551 Effective date: 20091125 Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS CORP., CA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORTION;REEL/FRAME:023699/0551 Effective date: 20091125 Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS CORP., CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORTION;REEL/FRAME:023699/0551 Effective date: 20091125 |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION,CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS CORP.;REEL/FRAME:023915/0446 Effective date: 20091210 Owner name: NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTHROP GRUMMAN SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS CORP.;REEL/FRAME:023915/0446 Effective date: 20091210 |
|
| FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 8 |
|
| FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 12 |